Impact of product-based e-cigarette marketing on the attitudes and behavioural intentions of young Australians: an experimental study

Abstract

BackgroundThe tobacco industry has a history of using language to downplay the harms associated with cigarettes and mislead consumers and policymakers. Emerging evidence suggests similar tactics are being used in the context of e-cigarettes; however, exploration of the impact of product name on attitudes towards e-cigarettes and susceptibility to use is lacking. This experimental study explored whether attitudes towards e-cigarettes and susceptibility to use are influenced by the names used by the industry to describe and market these products.MethodAn accredited web panel provider recruited a sample of 383 Australians aged 12–29 years who had never smoked to participate in an online survey that featured an embedded experiment. Participants were randomly allocated to one of three conditions, each of which used a different name to describe e-cigarettes (condition 1: ‘e-cigarettes’, condition 2: ‘vapes’; condition 3: either ‘IGETS’, ‘Puff Bars’, ‘HQD Cuvies’ or ‘Gunnpods’). The survey assessed respondents’ overall opinion of the product described; attitudes towards the product; liking of the product; and curiosity, willingness and intentions to use the product.ResultsThose in the ‘brand name’ condition scored higher than those in the ‘e-cigarettes’ condition on all dependent variables. Those in the ‘vapes’ condition scored higher than those in the ‘e-cigarettes’ condition on product attitude.ConclusionFindings indicate that the use of brand names and terms such as ‘vapes’ instead of ‘e-cigarettes’ results in more favourable attitudes towards e-cigarettes and susceptibility to use among young Australians. Results highlight the problematic influence of promotional language use favoured by industry.